Clean Elections

Arizona Speaker of the House Kirk Adams, who recently had to pay back money for legally tenuous free trips he got from the Fiesta Bowl, is doing all he can to pass legislation that would send a repeal of the state's Clean Elections system to the ballot--something that would be a victory for the special interests in the state.

One of the most important aspects of Fair Elections-style reform (sometimes referred to as "Clean Elections") is that it allows candidates to spend much more time with the voters in their community. Instead of spending countless hours dialing for dollars or attending high-priced fundraisers, candidates are able to better get to know the people the seek to serve, and when elected, legislate in their interest.

Whether it was apologizing to BP, the Fair Elections Now Act passing out of a U.S. House committee, or the Supreme Court declaring that corporations were people when it comes to spending money in elections, 2010 was a big year for news about money in the political process. Here's our top ten list. Leave your suggestions in the comments.

Public Campaign issued a press release today in response to the announcement that the U.S. Supreme Court would hear arguments in McComish v. Bennett, the lawsuit aiming to gut Arizona’s successful and popular Clean Elections program.

The Boston Globe (online) has a story on Maine State Senate President and gubernatorial candidate, Libby Mitchel (D), and the Clean Elections system in the state.

“If I qualify, there will be no more fund-raising and I will spend every waking hour campaigning around the state,’’ Mitchell, a Democrat who serves as state Senate president, promised the dozen attendees in Bangor. “I’ll never ask again. When you see me coming, you won’t have to run.’’

An article in the April issue of Reader's Digest asks "How can your congressman serve you when he's constantly hunting for campaign cash?" The piece, which highlights Public Campaign, goes on to lambast the money chase, offering Clean Elections as a solution.